Open
Conversation
Signed-off-by: vsoch <vsoch@users.noreply.github.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a WIP (adds to the grow PR) to add more tests for satisfy. What we've learned is that when the call is done via
Matchwith thematch_opequivalent toMatchSatisfiability, this calls an update function in the dfu traverser without arguments that doesn't do anything. The equivalent called with some form ofMatchAllocatecalls update with the overload version that actually calculates / creates the allocation to return.We likely will want a variant (another match type?) that says "Do a satisfy" (don't actually put the job in the graph) but tell me what you would have given me. Right now, the Satisfy functionality can mostly just serve as a boolean to indicate possible or not.